Comment # 9
on bug 8022
from Evan Huus
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > The reconstructed capture file is 1.6 GB in size and contains some 2 million
> > packets. I've split it up into 100,000-packet chunks and have not been able
> > to reproduce the issue, but I don't have enough RAM available to open the
> > entire file at once.
>
> The radix tree (or whatever that data structure is called)
It is a radix tree, although it's implemented rather oddly (with the hard-coded
level counts everywhere). Realistically we're never going to get 2^40 packets
worth of frame data, but there is a small part of me that wants to rewrite it
to cleanly support an arbitrary number of levels.
> for the frame
> data structures needs to get sufficiently deep for the problem to show up,
> so a smaller file might not do the job. 0-1024 frames -> root node + leaf
> nodes, and 1025-1048576 frames -> root node + 1 level of intermediate nodes
> + leaf nodes, so you need > 1048576 nodes to get to 2 levels of intermediate
> nodes.
This makes sense. Sounds like I'm going to need to invest in more RAM to
reproduce - I've been looking for an excuse ;)
> I reproduced the problem with the full capture, and the fix (to what was,
> indeed, two cut-and-pasteos of mine) fixes the problem.
Excellent, thank you very much.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.
